3 is clearly out, 5 seems overly complex
Personally I would use 1.
8 Sep 2020, 20:09 by [email protected]:
> Hi,
> in the comments of a changeset [1], there is a discussion about how to tag
> the required body height for users of an attraction in a theme park.
> Likewise, some playgrounds have restrictions on the size of children.
>
> Currently there is no well-defined tagging scheme for this and there is an
> awful lot of different tagging applied. These tags are currently in use on
> attractions - which scheme gets your support?
>
>
> 1. minheight / maxheight - like the common tag on roads for the height of
> vehicles (used ~50 times each)
>
> 2. attraction:minheight / attraction:maxheight (used 37 and 11 times,
> respectively)
>
> 3. min_height / (max_height) - used a few times in this context, but
> indistinguishable to the 3D-tagging of the lower end of the attraction itself.
>
> 4. minimum_height_requirement / maximum_height_requirement (used 143 and 4
> times)
>
> 5. height_requirement - with both minimum and maximum size in one value (used
> 7 times)
>
>
> I'm very much in favor of the first option.
>
>
>
> [1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/90228325
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
>
_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
